Elkharwily v. Kaiser Permanente

Opinion

1 2 3

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT TACOMA 7 ALAA ELKHARWILY, CASE NO. C20-5505 BHS 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 9 v. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 11 Defendant. 12

13 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Alaa Elkharwily’s (“Plaintiff”) 14 motion for reconsideration. Dkt. 62. 15 On September 24, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to remand and denied 16 his requests to impose sanctions under either the remand statute or Rule 11. Dkt. 61. On 17 October 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion requesting reconsideration of the denial 18 of attorney’s fees and sanctions. Dkt. 62. 19 Motions for reconsideration are governed by Local Rule 7(h), which provides as 20 follows: 21 Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior 22 1 ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence. 2 Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(h). “[A] motion for reconsideration should not be 3 granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is presented with 4 newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in 5 the controlling law.” Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 890 (9th Cir. 6 2000) (quoting 389 Orange Street Partners v. Arnold, 179 F.3d 656, 665 (9th Cir. 1999)). 7 In this case, Plaintiff has failed to establish that the Court committed any error in 8 declining to award sanctions. First, any award is within the Court’s discretion. Lussier v. 9 Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., 518 F.3d 1062, 1065 (9th Cir. 2008) (“We review the award of 10 fees and costs for abuse of discretion”). Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of 11 establishing a manifest error in the Court exercising its discretion to deny fees. 12 Second, Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and failed to establish any unnecessary 13 attorney’s fees or costs he incurred as a result of removal. Regarding the request for 14 sanctions, Plaintiff has failed to establish any sanctionable conduct. Therefore, the Court 15 DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated this 13th day of October, 2020. 18 A 19 20 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge 21